From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Richter Subject: Re: how to use scsi_remove_device Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 20:37:17 +0100 Message-ID: <441DB2ED.703@s5r6.in-berlin.de> References: <1142598225.25906.256865850@webmail.messagingengine.com> <441B1388.20704@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <441B1C7F.2090605@s5r6.in-berlin.de> <1142629908.15834.15.camel@markh3.pdx.osdl.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:50589 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750755AbWCSTiA (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Mar 2006 14:38:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1142629908.15834.15.camel@markh3.pdx.osdl.net> Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Haverkamp Cc: Mark Salyzyn , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Eric Moore , Leon Woestenberg Mark Haverkamp wrote: > On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 21:30 +0100, Stefan Richter wrote: >>But aacraid and mptsas call scsi_add_device + scsi_remove_device + >>scsi_device_put. AFAICS this is either one scsi_device_put too many or >>one scsi_device_get too few. ... > Looking at commsup.c, though, I think that the scsi_device_put is done > after the scsi_device_lookup ... Yes, the scsi_device_put is correct since scsi_device_lookup took a reference. -- Stefan Richter -=====-=-==- --== =--== http://arcgraph.de/sr/